Some compile-time computations can be better (faster) implemented as recursive constexpr functions. I would like to see some performance comparisons between constexpr and vanilla metaprogramming. Sumant On 3 April 2012 10:56, Dave Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com> wrote:
In order to measure the compile-time efficiency of various C++11 metaprogramming techniques, I'd like to put together a set of benchmarks, and I wanted to discuss here what kinds of tests might be appropriate. Aleksey and I came up with some benchmarks for an appendix to http://boostpro.com/mplbook/, but some of those are lost and they're all getting a bit crusty. Certainly, I have no confidence that they are realistic or useful. If anyone has ideas about this, I'd be very glad to hear them.
Thanks in advance,
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- int main(void) { while(1) KeepWorking(); }